839
this post was submitted on 17 Oct 2023
839 points (98.7% liked)
News
36086 readers
4741 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.
Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.
7. No duplicate posts.
If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.
All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Because they were looking for him and murdered him on purpose.
I just read the article and that is absolutely disgusting, even if the deputy's side of the story is all true why are they allowed kill someone for "resisting arrest??" Shouldn't they only use their gun if their life or the lives of members of the public are being threatened? I really hope that cop gets life in prison and has an extremely miserable rest of his life like the cop that murdered George Floyd, but something tells me that won't be happening here.
You read the article?
They tried to stun him twice, use a baton, the only option left was to use the gun. I'm not saying the story is 100% true, and I don't know what he was even arrested for in the first place, but that is exactly the kind of restrained escalation you would expect.
Edit: Added first line of the quote for further context. Can you lot just please read the fucking article? Pick your battles, this isn't a good one.
He was already wrongfully locked up for 16 years and they wanted him back in jail again, that's all.
When he quite rightfully resisted, they murdered him.
It was 100% purposeful on the police's part.
He rightfully resisted arrest? Even if the arrest is unlawful, resisting arrest is clearly illegal.
It's a big assumption to say that they wanted him back in jail. It might be somewhat likely, but we don't know either way. We don't know the reason for his arrest.
Actually there is some nuance; most people don't know you actually do have the right to resist unlawful arrest to some extent.
Sauce
Funky, hopefully Cure's lawyers can use that.
Not after he's dead, and if that's your point, go sit down in the corner with the other bootlickers.
Are the rest of his family not called Cure?
And the punishment for breaking any law is death? Or from your prior comment:
Yeah, the gun was the only option. You definitely can't just let someone run away for resisting arrest at a traffic stop. Even if you impound their now-abandoned car, they might go on a whole spree of resisting arrests or something.
In case you can't tell my tone is past sarcasm and well into disgust.
So it's ok for police to let an aggressive and violent man run loose?
Using a stun gun on a compliant driver isn't acceptable
But the driver wasn't compliant though. He was first put under arrest, then became violent, then the stun gun came out. 2 tries with the stun gun, then the baton, then the gun.
Personally I would prefer the officer didn't have a gun, and that all handguns were banned like in other countries, but the escalation seems appropriate (at least according to the account given, no telling if it's actually true).
Controversial oppinion, perhaps: would it not have been a better option to just, give up and let him go (for now), rather than fucking shoot him? I mean, wasn't this over a traffic stop?
Maybe, maybe not. If he were to then go off and commit a serious crime, people would be asking why the officer let him get away.
Are you saying police should shoot people during routine traffic stops just in case, because they might otherwise commit a serious crime at a later date?
the driver became violent after the stun gun was used
Oh so he tortured him with a stun gun until he murdered him glad we got that straight
You don't have anything straight. You're just raging and irrational.
What's irrational is the fear (or possibly even hate hopefully not) that this officer had for this man.
I'm no expert but I'm inclined to think it's the fear that officers get indoctrinated with in training and from the media that causes these types of things. They went up to that car on high alert thinking they were in danger because their job is known for danger and they are trained that any incident could turn deadly. So they walk up ready to pull their weapons.
Yes. The man, on the other hand, had a rational fear of the cops given his history. No wonder he resisted - I wouldn't be surprised if he had a panic reaction to being arrested. Obviously, the best outcome would have been if he had complied, I'm not saying it's okay to resist even an illegal arrest necessarily, but sometimes you panic and react irrationally. That's just being human.